On Sunday’s episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, Greg Perkins and I answered questions on achieving practical certainty, the limits of sympathy for failures, scolding other people’s children, responding to panhandlers, and more. The podcast of that episode is now available for streaming or downloading.

You can automatically download podcasts of Philosophy in Action Radio by subscribing to Philosophy in Action’s Podcast RSS Feed:


Whole Podcast: 18 August 2013

Listen or Download:

Remember the Tip Jar!

The mission of Philosophy in Action is to spread rational principles for real life… far and wide. That’s why the vast majority of my work is available to anyone, free of charge. I love doing the radio show, but each episode requires an investment of time, effort, and money to produce. So if you enjoy and value that work of mine, please contribute to the tip jar. I suggest $5 per episode or $20 per month, but any amount is appreciated. In return, contributors can request that I answer questions from the queue pronto, and regular contributors enjoy free access to premium content and other goodies.


Podcast Segments: 18 August 2013

You can download or listen to my answers to individual questions from this episode below.

Introduction

My News of the Week: My first three-phase event on Lila last Sunday went very well, as I blogged here, and I’m looking forward to my second (and last of 2013) in October. Since I can’t broadcast this Sunday, Greg and I will host a “Rapid Fire Extravaganza” on Thursday evening. The podcast will be posted on Sunday.

Question 1: Achieving Practical Certainty

Question: What must I do to reach certainty about a course of action? Suppose that I’m being careful in my thinking about a practical matter – perhaps about how to solve a problem at work, whether to move to a new city, whether to marry my girlfriend, or whether to cut contact with a problem friend. When can I say that I’m certain – or at least justified in acting on my conclusions? Given my personality type (INTP), I tend to leave questions open for far too long, when really, at some point, I need to close them. Are there any general guidelines or principles around figuring out what that point of closure should be? Even then, when should I revisit my conclusions, if ever?

My Answer, In Brief: Practical certainty is possible – as is changing course when you realize that you’ve made a mistake. Basically, a person must understand the costs of deliberating too much or too little, then aim for the right amount given the choice being made in the context of his other values.

Listen or Download:

Links:

  • Meyers-Briggs Personality Types: INTP and INFJ

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 2: The Limits of Sympathy for Failures

Question: How much sympathy should I have for people failing in their obligations due to personal struggles? In the past two years, I’ve witnessed two businesses (both one-person operations) crash and burn due to the owners’ inability to continue to operate while suffering from severe depression. I don’t know the trigger in the first case, but in the second case, the depression was precipitated by a divorce, then the murder of a toddler in the family. The business is online, and unhappy customers have been airing their frustration with the fact that they never received goods already paid-for. Some friends are stepping in to help, but the owner’s reputation has been ruined. How much slack should I – or others aware of the situation – cut the owner? How far should my sympathy go?

My Answer, In Brief: Be sympathetic to this person facing personal tragedy, but you need to protect yourself by keeping your distance.

Listen or Download:

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 3: Scolding Other People’s Children

Question: Is it wrong to discipline other people’s children when they refuse to do so? I was eating lunch at an outdoor market. A woman and her son stopped near me, and the boy (who was probably around 8 years old) leaned over my table and stuck his finger in my food. Then he started laughing and ran around in circles. The mom looked at me and dismissively said, “He’s autistic.” Then she walked away. How should I have responded? Is there a respectful way to tell a stranger that her son’s behavior is unacceptable in a public setting? Would it be wrong to speak to the boy directly?

My Answer, In Brief: The child’s behavior was inappropriate, and you’re entitled to assert your boundaries. You can do so kindly but firmly – and this encounter is an opportunity to practice that.

Listen or Download:

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 4: Responding to Panhandlers

Question: How should I respond to panhandlers asking for money? I live and work in a downtown area, and I am often asked by strangers on the street for money. These requests vary in form from the brief but honest (“Spare some change?”) to the manipulative and dishonest. My stock response is to say that I have no cash, which is almost always true, but somewhat dishonest in that my lack of cash is not my main reason for refusing to give. Explaining my real reasons – I don’t know who this person is, I don’t know how he will spend the money, and I don’t think giving people money helps reduce their reliance on handouts in the future – seems overly harsh on someone who is obviously having a rough time of it already, and takes a long time to boot. I feel like I should acknowledge the request somehow, but I want to effectively disengage from the situation as quickly and safely as possible. Is my stock response inappropriate because it is dishonest? If I shouldn’t be using my stock response, what can I say to quickly and safely disengage? Also, I get a lot of dubious stories about being stranded downtown without bus fare. I’ve often thought about carrying a few valid, single-use transit tickets with which to respond to such stories. It’s something I can afford, and it would in theory limit how my charity gets used. Would this be a wise or safe course of action?

My Answer, In Brief: Giving money to panhandlers likely feeds addicts and scammers, not people in genuine distress. If you don’t want to give, decline promptly and civilly, then move on. If you want to give, then find a suitable charity or some non-saleable item.

Listen or Download:

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Rapid Fire Questions

Questions:

  • I’ve heard the phrase “Happy Sunday” frequently on the show. Is there some special meaning to this phrase? It reminds me too much of religion, but I’d like to warm up to it.
  • What is your opinion of the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement?
  • Due to a Christian upbringing, I find that I often say things like, “Those good Samaritans helped me,” or “that’s a Goliath task!” Should I work to remove these from my repertoire, or are they okay?
  • Did you experiment with other diets (e.g. low carb, raw, vegetarian, etc) to see how they made you feel before settling on paleo as the best diet for you?

Listen or Download:

  • Start Time: 1:02:09
  • Duration: 11:58
  • Download: MP3 Segment

To comment on these questions or my answers, visit its comment thread.

Conclusion

Be sure to check out the topics scheduled for upcoming episodes! Don’t forget to submit and vote on questions for future episodes too!

  • Start Time: 1:14:07


About Philosophy in Action Radio

Philosophy in Action Radio focuses on the application of rational principles to the challenges of real life. It broadcasts live on most Sunday mornings and many Thursday evenings over the internet. For information on upcoming shows, visit the Episodes on Tap. For podcasts of past shows, visit the Show Archives.

Philosophy in Action's NewsletterPhilosophy in Action's Facebook PagePhilosophy in Action's Twitter StreamPhilosophy in Action's RSS FeedsPhilosophy in Action's Calendar


  • John Pryce

    This is going to sound like a strange question Diana, but here goes…

    I’m not a violent person by nature. I don’t enjoy fighting. I don’t hang out with people who do. And while I enjoy action films that feature violence, it’s usually the story that draws me.

    On the other hand, I find videos like this ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKQSv8p9BXU WARNING! Language, animated violence and gore) to be hilariously funny. I love violent comedies like The Expendables (yes, it’s a comedy) and Zombieland as well; and the violence is not incidental to the comedy in those films, it’s central.

    Is there anything wrong with finding violence – really serious, bloody, gory violence -, given a certain state of “suspension of disbelief” of course, to be genuinely funny?

    Just to qualify, I wouldn’t laugh at one of al Quieda’s snuff films, for example. And if they tried to do something comedic with the murder, that would horrify me instead (I also don’t find all kinds of violence funny; it wouldn’t please me for a film to try to make comedy out of violence towards animals or children, for example).

    • http://www.philosophyinaction.com/ Diana Hsieh

      Interesting! I’ve just submitted that question to the Rapid Fire Queue, and I expect that we’ll answer it in the “Rapid Fire Extravaganza” on Thursday evening!

   
Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha